Computer Gaming PCs Try To Stack Up To Consoles

bippy writes "RedAssedBaboon has what I think is the first review of a computer to feature the much lauded DISCover technology. DISCover basically turns a computer into a gaming console, allowing you to drop a PC game into a system and play it immediately on your television. The site reviews a new DHS (Digital Home System) by Alienware which will feature the technology and is due out next month. The article ends with this interesting comment: 'It's high time that the computer stop lurking in the shadows of dusty computer desks in forgotten rarely-used bedrooms. If PC gaming is going to survive it's going to have to do so in the well-lit family rooms and dens of America right along side the GameCube, PS2 and Xbox -- and this looks like a great way to start.'" We previously discussed the DISCover 'Drop And Play' PC gaming system over on Slashdot Games.

Comments

The advantage of using TV

[Anonymous Coward]

Is that graphics can be much more crappy and still look okay. Ever hook a Playstion up to a computer monitor? Ack.

widescreen

[Bog Standard]

Until my plasma TV does 1900x1200 or near enough. I will stick to the dark room. Thank you!

Price

[ward.deb]

Its price is way to high...in my opinion. I'd rather build a pc myself (with ultra silent cooling etc.) than buying this expensive crap...

Re:Price

[prockcore]

Its price is way to high...in my opinion.

No kidding. $2000-$2700 Gaming PCs try to stack up to $100-$150 consoles?

I wonder who is going to win.

Survival?

[Spua7]

All I have to say is "Lan Party." Games consoles will never have people stringing Cat5 across living rooms to stuff 15 geeks itching to blast each other away.

Re:Survival?

[Puff Daddy]

Games consoles will never have people stringing Cat5 across living rooms to stuff 15 geeks itching to blast each other away.

1. Have you ever heard of Halo?

Re:Survival?

[Kirby-meister]

That's funny, I've been playing multiplayer games with only one monitor on my consoles for years now.

From Super Bomberman to Golden Eye to Super Smash Brothers Melee. And I don't need CAT5 to tell my friend he's an idiot for kamikaze'ing just so he could take me out.

People who bring up "LAN party" as a pro compared to console gaming do not realize that console gamers have their own advantages in that respect. All we need is one $300-or-less console, 2-or-more controllers (and many bring their own controllers), and one copy of a game to enjoy multiplayer goodness. It's much more social to be sitting next to your competitor than across from them.

And Halo, as many have pointed out, offers that "LAN party" experience PC gamers seem to love. I can't see what's so good about it, though; Halo just doesn't do it for me. I'm not a fan of console FPS's.

Console game parties are a blast, though. Take over a lounge or rent some space for a night or two and share all the different systems and games you own with others, talk about past, present, and future classics, partake in a few tournaments, and just have a fun time socializing with other gamers. They don't happen as frequently as LAN parties do, I guess, but they're still fun and if you can check one out (or set one up!).

Re:Survival?

[0x0d0a]

Quarter-screen displays suck, though. A lot.

Re:Survival?

[devnullify]

Have you played Halo on an XBox? Have you done so with 16 other players across 4 or more consoles? Halo "got it right". The control scheme is nearly perfect (and if you don't like it, there are a number of alternate stick and button configurations to suit your play style), and the fact that everyone is using the same type of controller definitely helps balance the gameplay. No longer do you have to worry about the LPB with a Boomslang while you're stuck with a 20 year old Microsoft Mouse. As well, given a short amount of practice you can be as good (if not even better) with the controller as you would with a keyboard and mouse. The ability to easily modulate your movement speed by degrees is one major win that an analog console controller has over a keyboard and mouse, for example.

After playing at a 16 player Halo party for a weekend, I beg to differ. After at least 10 hours of straight playing, I'd still drop the controller in a second of a KB/mouse was availiable. Aiming with a stick simply sucks ass. It doesn't feel natural and can't react nearly as fast (or as slow) as a mouse can.

Console FPSs are good for having fun with others, but they suck single player because the controls are so awful.

Oh, great

[0x0d0a]

Oh, lovely. I can play games on a TV.

Let's see:

My computer monitor is higher-resolution than my TV.

My computer monitor is sharper than my TV.

My computer monitor has a higher refresh rather than my TV.

My computer monitor has more accurate color than my TV.

My computer monitor has fewer visual artifacts than my TV (shadowing, faint snow).

My computer monitor uses a better interface to talk to my computer (using a monitor cable running a VGA signal) than my TV (which uses NTSC).

My computer monitor can run at multiple resolutions, unlike my TV.

Really, the only things that TVs have going for them are that they're big.

Finally, it's not hard to get a sound card and video card that have TV out and audio out from the computer. As far as I can tell, this just loses the advantage of configurability that PC games allow.

Re:Oh, great

[geek]

TV's also have this thing called a "couch" going for them. I love my couch, it's much better than my computer chair. I also prefer a game controller to the repetitive stress injuries from my mouse and keyboard. Not every game is an FPS you know.

I think the Xbox is showing that with anti-aliasing resolution is moot, especially with HDTV sets.

Re:Oh, great

[Sj0]

While that's true, I've not found any that can give the same visual or audio quality as an XBox. Sound cards that have S/PDIF output are still quite expensive.

Since the X-Box uses an nvidia chip, it stands to reason that an nvidia sound card should do the trick. Most of my sound hardware is 20 years old(hey, when you buy quality, it lasts.) so I couldn't use it, but my stock asus motherboard came with optical sp/dif in and out.

Just pointing that out. :)

BS.

[dstillz]

'It's high time that the computer stop lurking in the shadows of dusty computer desks in forgotten rarely-used bedrooms. If PC gaming is going to survive it's going to have to do so in the well-lit family rooms and dens of America right along side the GameCube, PS2 and Xbox -- and this looks like a great way to start.'

BS.

PC gaming will survive, even if it's a niche market. There will always be college students in dorm rooms with modern computers that they were required to purchase. There will always be IT professionals with the wherewithal to keep up with the latest trends.

Console and PC games combined do not make up the lion's share of the entertainment market. Neither do cinema ticket sales or DVD purchases. As long as there's room for someone to turn a profit, variety will persist.

What would make this different than a console?

[Avoid_F8]

Last time I checked, the Xbox was nothing more than a stripped down x86 system that does nothing but play games. Doing this to any other PC would, in effect, make it just like any other console (albeit with customizeable hardware). But why bother?

I play PC games for three reasons.
1.) The latest hardware is almost always superior to that of a gaming console
2.) I have a mouse and keyboard to use, which gives me much more control than a 12 button controller.
3.) Online play is simply much easier and more popular on the PC and will always stay that way, despite what MS and EA would like you to believe. I think that it's also more fun, because console games generally attract more immature children.

Doesn't anyone else realize this too?

Re:What would make this different than a console?

[Osty]

1.) The latest hardware is almost always superior to that of a gaming console

It also costs a whole lot more to stay current, even if you factor in the cost of buying a good HDTV and DD5.1 home theater setup. As well, upgradeability is a two-edged sword. On the one hand, you can easily increase the capabilities of your machine, and get a better play experience. On the other hand, it makes software exponentially more difficult to write, and adds external dependencies such as drivers that games need to contend with, with the net result being that few games ever take advantage of cutting edge hardware when that hardware is truly cutting edge. Go to the store and look at the requirements on the back of any game, and I'll bet you'll see that most only really need a 1GHz processor, 256MB of RAM, and a GeForce3-level video card, even though processors are much faster now, RAM is cheap, and the GeForce3 is two generations old.

2.) I have a mouse and keyboard to use, which gives me much more control than a 12 button controller.

That's great for some types of games, and miserable for others. For example, I'd hate to play a real-time strategy game on an XBox because there's just not enough buttons to play well (at least, not if the RTS was designed for the PC; something like Full Spectrum Warrior, which has a control scheme that works very well on the XBox, is a pure joy to play with a controller). However, FPS games have proven that they work well with current controllers, and PC racing games require at least a joystick and more likely a steering wheel and pedals to be playable on a PC, while racing games excel on a platform like the XBox with its analog stick for steering and analog triggers for throttle and brakes. Sports games, adventure games, platformers, RPGs, and more work much better with a console's controller than a keyboard and mouse.

3.) Online play is simply much easier and more popular on the PC and will always stay that way, despite what MS and EA would like you to believe. I think that it's also more fun, because console games generally attract more immature children.

Spoken as one who has never played a game on XBox Live! :). A true service like XBox Live! is worth the $5/mo fee (less if you pay by the year) just for the integrated friends list, single sign-on, cross-game invites, and voice chat requirement. On the PC, each game has its own sign-on, and while software like GameSpy Arcade (damn, I remember when GameSpy was QuakeSpy, and not some game review website that just happens to provide horrible software) tries to mitigate that somewhat, you still can't easily keep track of friends across games (is Booger123 in BF the same as Booger123 in RTCW?), nor have a friend invite you into Counter-Strike while you're playing BF1942. As for immature children, I take it you haven't played Counter-Strike lately? :) XBox Live! has its share of immature players, as do all online games, but at least with Live! I can mute the player, or easily kick them out if I'm hosting a game, and send feedback about the player to a central server where if the user accumulates enough negative feedback there are consequences. Besides, by keeping track of my friends across games, I can avoid the riff-raff by playing with people I know aren't lame (whether I know them IRL or not) without requiring the time commitments or leetness of clan matches in the PC realm.

Doesn't anyone else realize this too?

Nope.

PC / Console

[LaserLyte]

While there are many advantages to using a PC as a console (such as expansiblity and the ability to use the system for other purposes), there are a few disadvantages too.

First, rather than relying on a constant, single-purpose firmware OS designed specifically for the hardware you're running on, you have to rely on a third-party OS (designed to do a lot more than just run games), so it's inevitable that you'll end up with a lot more crashes, etc. Now, crashes and failures on "PCs" are generally accepted and tolerated, but on a consumer appliance, this is probably not the case.

Second, you also have changing hardware. A developer writing a game for the playstation knows exactly what hardware will be there, exactly what to expect, and (probably) knows the exact hardware specifics. But, introduce the ability to change or upgrade hardware, and the constant environment changes. Also, there's probably not going to be any standard "controller".

On a different topic, would most people going be using a keyboard/mouse with this,? If so, surely we're going back to needing a desk -- something most console users probably don't use when playing on their console.

Family Participation

[powerpuffgirls]

For PC gaming to survive, it must receive acceptance from most family members. So a game that gives endless hours of enjoyment to one person is expensive at $50, but if it entertains 4 people, $50 is actually affordable, and it might even become a household grocery like biscuits or milk that everybody in the house eats or drinks.

Having said all the above, the problem is not the lighting or forgotten bedrooms, it's the interior design of this computer room.

If there's a fridge, a couple of lazyboy sofas and a coffee table in this 'computer gaming' room, i'm sure parents might venture in and stay there watching their kids knocking themselves out. In another word, we need a inviting gaming room.

I have a 'movie' room, which is dark (for projector), a couch and some beverages, and everybody can't wait to go in there.

Warning: Console Gamer Bias

[dancingmad]

I guess that's a reasonable first step but for me (a console gamer since I was a kid) it's not enough, for a number of reasons:

The PC is suited to different kinds of games than a console, most notably RTSes and FPSes.

You still have to upgrade computers (I know my 1.47 Athlon would need a huge upgrade to play Doom, my video card's a POS). With the consoles I can buy a machine and play any game that comes out for it (the console cycle is beginning to go more quickly, which is bad for the industry, but that's another submission entirely).

It just works - I don't have to tweak framerates, graphic modes, whatever - console games just work. PC games have to be tweaked because they have to deal with weird (and sometimes misconfigured) hardware.

My PC is usually doing something else - on IM, downloading, whatever, so this instant on feature doesn't help me much in that regard.

Go figure. This is news?

[foxtrot]

The last four video cards I've purchased, dating back to 2000, all had TV-out. Getting gaming on my TV's easy: plug up an S-Video cable, turn on the PC.

Is it just that someone's figured out how to market the stuff we've all had (admittedly, some of us unwittingly...) for the past half a decade or so?

That said, I don't use S-Video out for gaming. I use it for movies...

-JDF

It does to much

[TubeSteak]

Before you flame:

With an Alienware DHS system, you can record and play live TV, burn music, create digital slideshows, download movies, surf the web, and much more, all from one incredible system quietly situated in your living room.

Now I'm sure it can record more than 1 stream of video... right? Anyways, imagine this: Dad (the guy who bought this) has a show recording & Junior strolls in to try and play a game. Probably not going to work very well is it? Or the reverse, Junior is playing his game & the DVR functions kick in. The game starts lagging, because even with hyperthreading, the hard drive heads can't be in two places at once.

I'm assuming a hardware digital tv tuner & mpeg encoder because they aren't using ATI's AIW. You've got internet access on your TV, we all know how messy that can get. Sister is reading e-mail & chatting and Junior wants to play games.

This is just a setup for disaster if there's more than one child present. I'm sure families will use the fast-user-switching feature, what if it crashes? Shouldn't they wait for SP2 before shipping these out? God help you if there are porn popups while your parents watch TV.

Imagine how much of a mess it'll be trying to kick someone off the computer so you can watch tv. This is a great idea w/fast hardware.... but it's not going to work for everyone.

Re:It does to much

[pyrrhonist]

That would involve having sex with a woman. And we all know how hard that is.

It's not difficult at all. How do you think so many idiots end up with children?

let's compare

[bersl2]

Console: standard hardware, OS, drivers, and software
Computer: most anything goes
Even though the diversity of the computer makes it sometimes troublesome, the personalization is why many of us like it.

Console: drop in and play
Computer: drop in, install, configure, and then play
Only makes a difference if the middle two steps are hard for you.

Console: played at the TV, using a controller
Computer: played at a monitor, using keyboard and mouse
I don't know about you, but I can't stand first-person shooters on a console, using a controller. Different types of games are controlled best in different ways.

Console: used for playing games, and maybe CDs and DVDs
Computer: used for playing games, and CDs and DVDs, and for productivity, development, Internet browsing, etc...

For all I care, they can roll back the clock on computer gaming. But I am not playing Doom 3, Halflife 2, Halo 2, or any other FPS on a controller and going to enjoy it.

Heh consoles

[east coast]

Just as PCs in their current form will not exist in the near future (10 years give or take) neither will consoles. With the power of the common home PC and the increase in ownership consoles will lose in the long run. Not to even mention what Microsoft may do to the console market when the XBox gets a lion's share of the market. (for the naysayers remember that XBox has nearly unlimited funds behind it, when you have that kind of capital it's not a matter of it but rather a matter of when).

Mod Down

[TubeSteak]

How does trash like this get moderated up? You didn't even form an argument. First off, there's more going on here than meets the eye. They're not using AIW so they've got an independant tuner & mpeg decoder (they should, I hope they're not going to do mpeg in software.) It's a small form factor, has a remote & to top it off, it comes with a slot loading DVD drive that does everything. +R(W), -R(W), and RAM.

Nobody doubts that it can be done on your own, but it won't come out looking as good, you won't get 1 year of 24/7 tech support, you won't get replacement parts (that you can reinstall yourself w/o voiding the warranty) and last but not least AlienWare will send a tech to your door who knows the whole setup inside out.

No twiddling Linux to get it working. No driver hassles. You're buying a top notch product, tech support and it's not priced excessively higher than a similarly equipped PC.

Re:Mod Down

[Rew190]

The BOTTOM LINE is that you pay over 2 grand to play computer games on an essentially ghetto-rigged system. Why not just buy a middle-of-the-road computer with a nice video card for half that much? Is it an argument that people don't play computer games because they want to sit in their living rooms on a sofa?

I think consoles thrive on (comparatively) simple games that don't require too much futzing about. Simple controls, simple setup. Computer games tend to be much more control-hungry, with many games using an entire keyboard. I can't see myself sitting awkwardly with a keyboard on my lap while watching low-res TV (yes, HD, blah blah blah).

Besides, most guys I know love console games because you can sit down with your buddies and blow the piss out of each other on one TV. There aren't too many PC games with this functionality.

Re:Mod Down

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone paying 2 grand for a computer in the united states deserves to be ripped off. I built my last gaming rig for just over 1000.00. (p4 3ghz 800mhz fsb, ati 9800 pro 128meg, 120gig sata hard drive, sb audigy 2 zs, 1 gig pc 3200 ram (kingston because the i875 was new and had timing issues). It was the fastest thing on the market then, and while amd is faster now, this thing is no where near slow.

I also own a x-box, gamecube, ps2, and emulate all the other consoles on my pc and run mame. I mostly use the computer for fps games. I can not stand to use a controler to play a fps game. Plus, in games like EQOA, I ended up moving a smaller tv into the computer room so i could use the keyboard on my desk because typing on my living room table really sucked. Not to mention my gf and her friends constantly walking though the living room. So I end up playing at my computer desk anyways, and I need a good computer for work. So if it comes out for pc, i buy that first. My favorite reason for consoles has always been renting. I get bored of a game and when I buy it for the pc it costs me 50.00. When I rent it for the gamesystem it costs me 4.00.

Um... not quite

[Guppy06]

"If PC gaming is going to survive it's going to have to do so in the well-lit family rooms and dens of America right along side the GameCube, PS2 and Xbox"

No, if PC gaming is to survive it needs to have good games that are written right the first time and don't require you to own hardware that only came out just last week to run them.

Console gamers don't do PC gaming not because the installation process frightens us, it's because we don't consider it worth the time and money. Just because the games are plug-and-play and hook up to a television doesn't make them good. Just ask Acclaim.

The strategy is all wrong

[Bones3D_mac]

Ok, I'm confused here... who is their target market supposed to be? I don't personally know anyone who would justify spending $2,000-$3,000 on a pc based game console that will be rendered obsolete well before the sub-$200 consoles will.

Granted, they added features like Tivo style functions and the ability to surf the web and what not, but look at the history of such all-in-one devices in the past. When was the last time you bought a combo vcr/dvd player or a TV with dvd/vcr built into it?

No sane person would buy into such gimmicks. if one part breaks, the entire unit will likely has to be replaced. At $2,000-$3,000 a pop to keep $500+ worth of hardware in one neat box, I just don't see what incentive they are offering to make it worth the extra $1,500-$2,500 in the price. (I do know I'm not that concerned about hiding a couple wires.)

If they want to pitch this item as a game console, fine... then price it competatively with rest of the console gaming systems. If they don't want to lose the profits, then promote it as a niche market item, instead of confusing the consumers.

While I don't want to discredit the "Discover" technology, I do predict this system will ultimately fail. No one is going to buy something that cost more than your average PC, just to play the latest games at NTSC resolutions.

This is good.

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

The arguments that the TV makes a poor monitor misses the point.

The whole point is that PC gaming sucks. It really does. Complicated control schemes, techinical graphics settings, hardware incompatabilities, and 'we'll-fix-it-later' patching mindset really make the PC a poor gaming platform. This is supposed to allievate some of those problems. Which is good.

Re:This is good.

[Trogre]

Perhaps.

But when I'm playing my first-person shooter at 1280x1024 on my flicker-free 21" monitor, getting 100fps at 100Hz refresh... ... well let's just say you can keep your little game console.

Mods extend the replay value of games

[tepples]

How do I make mods of Bomberman, GoldenEye, or Super Smash Bros. Melee without violating the DMCA and without emigrating to a country that doesn't have the DMCA yet? Or let's put it another way: If Half-Life were a console game, then how could anybody have made Counter-Strike?

The Death of Gaming Redux

[Mulletproof]

"If PC gaming is going to survive it's going to have to do so in the well-lit family rooms and dens of America right along side the GameCube, PS2 and Xbox"

Whoops, PC Gaming vs. Console Gaming misconception #1: "PC gaming will die off because consoles will eventially have the same horsepower for a lower price."

WRONG.

It's an utter falicy that the PC needs to fight for it's life against a console in the gaming world for one simple fact-- Gaming on the PC is completely different. First, consider the kind of games you play on the PC versus those you play on a console. It's all an issue of complexity, and half of that is the input devices availible to you. Information management is where the console falls flat on it's face, into the mud and stays there. And it's not likely to get up anytime soon because of the fundemental philosophy behind it-- All information must be accessed through a gamepad in order to make gaming as brainless as possible. Even in comparible (and simpler) games, like FPSs, you will never find a device equal to a mouse, and it's something that console makers give a wide berth in favor of the formentioned philosophy.

Also, the PC is the home of grass roots gaming. With a PC, you can become the next Counter Strike of gaming. Speaking of which, what was the last count of people playing that mod? Yeah, keep telling me PC gamin is in trouble 9_9 The PC will also always be the home of cutting edge gaming, since developers don't have to wait until the next full out console release 3 years down the road to push the envelope a little further. If it's good, people will upgrade their hardware right the and there just to buy your product, royalty free I might add. No console barons, specialized code/hardware required.

But I guess we have to break out The Death of Gaming myth just to keep things lively now and then, right?

Meh? meh-w00t?

[Secret Chimp]

I don't understand how this is such a revolutionary kick in the nuts. I can do this with my current computer in about 2 minutes with a couple of cables.
If I want to play Halo or some MAME games or whatever on my TV, all I need to do is grab my s-video and miniplug-to-1/4" cables (for the stereo), take my laptop upstairs, plug in those 2 things and an external keyboard and mouse, and I'm good to go. If I want to listen to my MP3s on my good stereo, I just plug my laptop into my stereo, perhaps launch a no-sleep app so I can close the lid and put it in the stereo cabinet, and whoobie-doo.
Plus, when I'm done playing Halo or acting like a dancing fool, I can just unplug the cables, take my laptop back downt o my room at my desk, and I have a normal computer setup. Total cost over my existing home computer setup: 5 bucks.
Besides, I almost never do this. Personally, I prefer to play my computer games on my crisp LCD screen at a dense 1280x854 resolution, instead of 720x486 (or whatever standard NTSC screen resolution is) or an overscanned 800x600 on my TV.
(Yeah, consoles put out great graphics on TVs, but imagine if they could run games at normal monitor resolutions; pants around the world would be soiled)

are there no more gamers?

[CAIMLAS]

So, what's the deal with the gaming industry? Are they unwilling to sell to the loyal customers that have put the industry where it currently is now - the geeks?

It would seem to me that the following scenario might emmerge:

- gamers are being abandoned by game companies for the mass-produced consumer markets
- gamers will no longer have games that meet their interests
- new, innovative home-brew companies will pop up to meet the need, producing more fun games

THis might not be possible, due to the current situation with games where the development process is quite involved, but I still see it as possible. I personally hope it is, as I can't see myself playing many of the games made in the last few years...

Pointless?

[goatan]

Apart from the Auto game launch (and i'm sure I could work out some sort of scripting to do that) my home PC does all of that for $1039 I don't think I will pay $2000 for something i'm already doing. Not sure I would want Discover anyway how does it deal with games that it hasn't been programmed for? It is likely only to be useful for popular titles.

'It's high time that the computer stop lurking in the shadows of dusty computer desks in forgotten rarely-used bedrooms. If PC gaming is going to survive it's going to have to do so in the well-lit family rooms and dens of America right along side the Game Cube, PS2 and Xbox

Most consoles I have ever seen are sitting slap bang along side a PC in peoples bedrooms etc and if the console is in a family place then the PC is right there next to it anyway, PC's don't need to "compete" with Consoles there a different machine, it's like a sports car trying to be a truck or vice a versa both are excellent at what there designed for but don't work when doing the others job.